Puel

[Captain...]

4 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

What we've got to ask ourselves is should we entertain the idea of getting rid of a manager purely based on whether the players want him gone? Of course you have to consider the players thoughts because no matter how good a manager is, if they don't have the players onside there's going to be severe dangers but we've long moaned on here about the culture needing to change and the old guard to become less powerful. How do we go about that without backing a manager to build? It often takes a relegation or huge cull to see a club of our ilk rebuild, I'm hoping we don't see that happen but there's a lot of fractions in this club that need to be resolved otherwise I think nothing will change and we'll be sniffing around the danger of going down in the next few seasons.

 

I'm now of the opinion we give Puel free reign to go for it if he's showed to the owners that he's the brave and strong visionary that we need. If he is, I'd be very tempted to fcuk ANY player off that doesn't want to be part of this new era and that goes for Mahrez, Vardy, Schmeichel and any of our other main stayers. If any of these players are the sole reason for prolonging another year or two in this league without us building a new team then what's the point anyway, just get it over and done with. Puel has a way of playing that we've not really seen yet, he has strong full backs that act as wingers and 3 attacking midfielders that inter change behind a striker, this could be the style we need to have another real crack at the top 6. I'd hope he's learnt that fast and direct periods of play are a huge weapon in this league and that this can be blended with the style of play he's previously favoured. A large nucleus of this team can already do that so I hope he builds a new team with players still capable of that at times.

 

I'm about done with this title winning mob anyway, they're forever legends but I'd be ruthless and any of them that are gobbing off because Puel is daring to move things on without them all can do one.

I still don't buy that the players want him gone or are not performing for him, I think we are just struggling to adapt to a different way of playing. If they weren't playing for him they wouldn't be trying to adapt. Simpson, despite being shit at it, was always willing to get forwards and try and cross. He even accepted in an interview that he was being asked to play in a different way and struggling to adapt but he was sure he would.

 

Vardy has continued scoring, Mahrez has  been his usual mercurial self. Apart from a few bad games Maguire still looks class, Albrighton never stops trying even when played at right back. It is amazing how much that position has messed up our season. We looked good with Amartey at RB then he got injured, Mahrez went awol and we never looked the same team, until we played the 10 men of Arsenal.

 

To play the way Puel wants you need good full backs that contribute in the attacking third. Of course you have to question why Puel persisted with this way of playing when we didn't  have the players, but he did, maybe it will be beneficial next season that he stuck to his guns and didn't change things to sort the players, but it certainly cost us this season. I really hope I never have to see Danny Simpson try and cross the ball again.

[lestajigs]

18 hours ago, HighPeakFox said:

Nicely backed down.

You’ll be backing down when is are in the bottom 3 after 10 games 

[Nigel Graham Pearson]

Must be hell playing under him if a highly-rated ex-player of his, who could likely do better than us (money and prestige-wise), is happy to come here. 

[HighPeakFox]

29 minutes ago, lestajigs said:

You’ll be backing down when is are in the bottom 3 after 10 games 

I'm sensible enough not to paint myself into a corner. 

[Chocolate Teapot]

11 minutes ago, Nigel Graham Pearson said:

Must be hell playing under him if a highly-rated ex-player of his, who could likely do better than us (money and prestige-wise), is happy to come here. 

I don't doubt Puel would have had a word, but we offered a lot more money than any other club wages and transfer fee, so that's a big factor as well.

[fuchsntf]

5 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

What we've got to ask ourselves is should we entertain the idea of getting rid of a manager purely based on whether the players want him gone? Of course you have to consider the players thoughts because no matter how good a manager is, if they don't have the players onside there's going to be severe dangers but we've long moaned on here about the culture needing to change and the old guard to become less powerful. How do we go about that without backing a manager to build? It often takes a relegation or huge cull to see a club of our ilk rebuild, I'm hoping we don't see that happen but there's a lot of fractions in this club that need to be resolved otherwise I think nothing will change and we'll be sniffing around the danger of going down in the next few seasons.

 

I'm now of the opinion we give Puel free reign to go for it if he's showed to the owners that he's the brave and strong visionary that we need. If he is, I'd be very tempted to fcuk ANY player off that doesn't want to be part of this new era and that goes for Mahrez, Vardy, Schmeichel and any of our other main stayers. If any of these players are the sole reason for prolonging another year or two in this league without us building a new team then what's the point anyway, just get it over and done with. Puel has a way of playing that we've not really seen yet, he has strong full backs that act as wingers and 3 attacking midfielders that inter change behind a striker, this could be the style we need to have another real crack at the top 6. I'd hope he's learnt that fast and direct periods of play are a huge weapon in this league and that this can be blended with the style of play he's previously favoured. A large nucleus of this team can already do that so I hope he builds a new team with players still capable of that at times.

 

I'm about done with this title winning mob anyway, they're forever legends but I'd be ruthless and any of them that are gobbing off because Puel is daring to move things on without them all can do one.

Somewhere between you @captain and @Babyon  lies the frustrating truth.

I want Puel now..!!  and His rebuilding Plans  To be given whole Hearted Support,

Yes He,and the Clubs Future approach has to be Held Accountable...but a new

Season will sooner be in us than expected. In my naivity following the prophecies

of @blue-tinted-specs, lets Cut Out the negatives,give the whole Puel-platform

now Patience,Space to rebuild and developed,that new Ethos and Platform,

we all Know ist needed.....The Puel Squad of the near Future,needs some bedding in time.

By end of October ITS got to be Seen there is something to hold onto,by Receiver,

Consistency and Performances have to be there.....If by even October IT goes

T*TS Up.....Shooting Ränge can be Opened.

[Donut]

45 minutes ago, Abrasive fox said:

I don't doubt Puel would have had a word, but we offered a lot more money than any other club wages and transfer fee, so that's a big factor as well.

His point was that an excellent player who could probably play for better clubs and has been playing at a champions league level can sign and want to play for someone supposedly demotivating and confusing, but a few twonks who cant adapt to passing the ball dont.

 

Think its fairly obvious where the problem lies, and it aint Puel.

[Stadt]

Obviously Puel isn't anywhere near as good a coach as Klopp or Guardiola but it took both a significant amount of time to mould the their teams into shape and both clubs are reaping the rewards now. Of course it doesn't mean the same will happen here, under Puel we could continue in the same vein as we played in 2018 but with key additions and a preseason hopefully we are more prepared to play in his desired play style.

[Col city fan]

1 hour ago, Nigel Graham Pearson said:

Must be hell playing under him if a highly-rated ex-player of his, who could likely do better than us (money and prestige-wise), is happy to come here. 

As I’ve said before, I guess there are probably 60/70 thousand reasons, per week, which might have made him leave Portugal?

[Donut]

6 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

As I’ve said before, I guess there are probably 60/70 thousand reasons, per week, which might have made him leave Portugal?

But if youd worked with Puel before, and he was a genuinely confusing, demotivating man, then why wouldn't you earn your 60 or 70 thousand reasons at the other clubs you were linked with, if you were in high demand?

 

The fact he has a good relationship with Puel suggests a) it might be an extra admittedly small piece of bargaining power we might hold for future signings, and b) that his style of management isn't the depression inducing confused mess some people like to think it is.

[Nigel Graham Pearson]

9 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

As I’ve said before, I guess there are probably 60/70 thousand reasons, per week, which might have made him leave Portugal?

Yes, and that was oh-so witty of you. As I suggested though, if money was his only concern I doubt he’d have ended up here. 

[turtmcfly]

3 minutes ago, Nigel Graham Pearson said:

Yes, and that was oh-so witty of you. As I suggested though, if money was his only concern I doubt he’d have ended up here. 

Not even very witty, given the original comment was about coming to us over someone else, not simple about why he left Portugal.

[Col city fan]

57 minutes ago, Nigel Graham Pearson said:

Yes, and that was oh-so witty of you. As I suggested though, if money was his only concern I doubt he’d have ended up here. 

If you genuinely believe that modern  footballers will give up money to ‘work with previous bosses’ then I suggest you are naive. Pereira must have been offered a considerable package to join us and not the so-called bigger clubs. If he likes Puel, I’m sure that would be a factor. But I doubt for one moment it’s the main one.

And I wasn’t trying to be witty. I suspect the 60/70 thou a week is a very conservative estimate.

That said, who gives a shite really. He’s joined us and if he’s as good as everyone is making out, he’ll be a super signing. 

[Col city fan]

2 hours ago, Abrasive fox said:

I don't doubt Puel would have had a word, but we offered a lot more money than any other club wages and transfer fee, so that's a big factor as well.

Ah did we...?. There you go then... the truth outs, so to speak.

Or am I being too witty?

Edited 21 May 2018 by Col city fan

[Donut]

3 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

If you genuinely believe that modern  footballers will give up money to ‘work with previous bosses’ then I suggest you are naive. Pereira must have been offered a considerable package to join us and not the so-called bigger clubs. If he likes Puel, I’m sure that would be a factor. But I doubt for one moment it’s the main one.

And I wasn’t trying to be witty. I suspect the 60/70 thou a week is a very conservative estimate.

That said, who gives a shite really. He’s joined us and if he’s as good as everyone is making out, he’ll be a super signing. 

60 or 70k is not a substantial amount of money for a top level footballer and im sure could have easily been matched or exceeded by other clubs.

 

Obviously we don't know how much he is actually being paid, but I would estimate other clubs could have easily offered him more.

 

So whilst relationship with the manager is clearly a small part of the deal, then it played some part as if it was purely a money thing, he could have got more.

 

1 minute ago, Col city fan said:

Ah did we...?. There you go then... the truth outs, so to speak.

Or am I being too witty?

 

How would he know? did he negotiate the deal for him? ITK and all that.....

[Col city fan]

Just now, Donut said:

60 or 70k is not a substantial amount of money for a top level footballer and im sure could have easily been matched or exceeded by other clubs.

 

Obviously we don't know how much he is actually being paid, but I would estimate other clubs could have easily offered him more.

 

So whilst relationship with the manager is clearly a small part of the deal, then it played some part as if it was purely a money thing, he could have got more.

 

How would he know? did he negotiate the deal for him? ITK and all that.....

It would be a strange thing for @Abrasive fox to state if he DID’NT have some info? Why so we offered a lot more if we didn’t? I don’t see the point.

I reiterate, I would strongly suspect there is an awful lot more to this deal than some romantic notion about wanting to come and play for Claude. Or at least, that being the main factor. I simply don’t think modern footballers think that way.

[HighPeakFox]

1 hour ago, Col city fan said:

As I’ve said before, I guess there are probably 60/70 thousand reasons, per week, which might have made him leave Portugal?

It was 50, last time I checked. Have your posts been suffering hyper inflation? 

Edited 21 May 2018 by HighPeakFox

[Col city fan]

5 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

It was 50, last time I checked. Have your posts been suffering hyper inflation? 

 

I think I under-estimated the first time

It is such a shame FT always resorts to this juvenile tete a tete. I tend to find myself getting dragged into it when I don’t really want to be, but there you go. I shouldn’t bite. 

One CAN suggest that a player’s main motivator for moving club is predominantly financial, without it having to mean that you think the manager for whom he is signing is a plonker. It is possible to separate the two. I have no doubt that Pereira probably gets on with Puel, but the main incentive won’t be playing for Puel, it will be the whole package.

[foxinsocks]

8 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

I think I under-estimated the first time

It is such a shame FT always resorts to this juvenile tete a tete. I tend to find myself getting dragged into it when I don’t really want to be, but there you go. I shouldn’t bite. 

One CAN suggest that a player’s main motivator for moving club is predominantly financial, without it having to mean that you think the manager for whom he is signing is a plonker. It is possible to separate the two. I have no doubt that Pereira probably gets on with Puel, but the main incentive won’t be playing for Puel, it will be the whole package.

I wouldn't sign for puel even if they paid me to... you've got to be true to yourself and have integrity... though I am minted and so money has little incremental value

 

[Clever Fox]

2 hours ago, Wookie said:

Obviously Puel isn't anywhere near as good a coach as Klopp or Guardiola but it took both a significant amount of time to mould the their teams into shape and both clubs are reaping the rewards now. Of course it doesn't mean the same will happen here, under Puel we could continue in the same vein as we played in 2018 but with key additions and a preseason hopefully we are more prepared to play in his desired play style.

Not quite true, Klopp has players train to within an inch of their lives. The Coach, was his right hand man who left recently. Who also persuaded him to sign Salah,  Klopp didn't really believe in Salah.

But you are right, it takes time to build a team, generally 3 years, which is roughly how long it took City and Liverpool.

Purl is a well respected  French Coach, and from a period when France has produced quite a few top top Teams/Coaches/ Managers. I think the only thing in question is if he has the ability to manage at a high level.

His record suggests with a Club willing to spend and give him time to bring a few players in he can be a success. His first two signings here look to fit the bill. With a few more signings and a full pre season I think we'll be ok.  What I am sure of the Man deserves to be given a fair chance.

[leicesterseddon]

23 hours ago, The Doctor said:

Eh, pearson convinced fuchs to sign and left about a week later.

 

I take your point - although Fuchs was a free transfer and this isn't. 

 

I'm not saying I have a crystal ball, but I don't see why the board would allow a manager to spend £22m on a right-back only to sack him soon after. 

 

I could be wrong though, nothing would surprise me with LCFC these days. 

[foxinsocks]

13 minutes ago, leicesterseddon said:

 

I take your point - although Fuchs was a free transfer and this isn't. 

 

I'm not saying I have a crystal ball, but I don't see why the board would allow a manager to spend £22m on a right-back only to sack him soon after. 

 

I could be wrong though, nothing would surprise me with LCFC these days. 

I think you are right.... sadly.  I believe it is a disgrace... peul is unable to command the respect of the players... why employ expensive players and hire someone to command them and motivate them who is unable to speak english

[st albans fox]

15 minutes ago, leicesterseddon said:

 

I take your point - although Fuchs was a free transfer and this isn't. 

 

I'm not saying I have a crystal ball, but I don't see why the board would allow a manager to spend £22m on a right-back only to sack him soon after. 

 

I could be wrong though, nothing would surprise me with LCFC these days. 

A bit left field but how about ‘WE NEED A FRIGGING RIGHT BACK AND THIS FELLA IS APPARENTLY ONE OF THE BEST OUT THERE’ ??

 

is that feasible ??

[Nigel Graham Pearson]

3 hours ago, Col city fan said:

It would be a strange thing for @Abrasive fox to state if he DID’NT have some info? Why so we offered a lot more if we didn’t? I don’t see the point.

I reiterate, I would strongly suspect there is an awful lot more to this deal than some romantic notion about wanting to come and play for Claude. Or at least, that being the main factor. I simply don’t think modern footballers think that way.

Nobody has represented Pereira as being absolutely desperate to come and play for Puel, he’s not. That’s a misrepresentation on your part. Yes, obviously the kind of money we can offer is a huge pull. Neither of those things are controversial. 

 

The point is, it doesn’t do Puel any harm if the guy, who is on the up in his career, is willing to play under him again. That doesn’t jibe with the information/‘information’ we’ve had from @Abrasive fox (do you have any ITK knowledge that doesn’t tend to make Puel look bad, mate?) who has suggested players like Vardy can’t bear to be here under Puel. 

Edited 21 May 2018 by Nigel Graham Pearson

[Chocolate Teapot]

11 hours ago, Nigel Graham Pearson said:

Nobody has represented Pereira as being absolutely desperate to come and play for Puel, he’s not. That’s a misrepresentation on your part. Yes, obviously the kind of money we can offer is a huge pull. Neither of those things are controversial. 

 

The point is, it doesn’t do Puel any harm if the guy, who is on the up in his career, is willing to play under him again. That doesn’t jibe with the information/‘information’ we’ve had from @Abrasive fox (do you have any ITK knowledge that doesn’t tend to make Puel look bad, mate?) who has suggested players like Vardy can’t bear to be here under Puel. 

 

 

No mate, I don't.

 

If I hear something positive I'll let you know, but then when someone doesn't listen to the staff and alienates himself from them I don't imagine I'll hear a lot of positive stuff.